There may be a nomenclatural problem with the Chinese plants known under this name. The only locality mentioned in the protologue is Sylhet in Bangladesh. The gathering Wallich 5147A (BM, K), labeled D. terniflora and from Sylhet, is original material for the name but clearly belongs to the species traditionally known as D. elliptica. If one of these specimens were designated as the lectotype of D. terniflora that name would fall into the synonymy of D. elliptica leaving the Chinese plants without a name. However, it is possible that these Chinese plants are less robust individuals of D. hokouensis characterized by smaller stature, simple inflorescence, and shorter pedicels. Further collections are needed to ascertain their true identity.